Talk:Fracture (2007 film)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Film Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Films. This project is a central gathering of editors working to build comprehensive and detailed articles for film topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the priority scale.
Editing Guidelines Please remember these guidelines when editing a film article: If a non-film article already exists with the name of the film that you are trying to create an article for, disambiguate and use (film) in the title: Film Title (film) For more information see: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (films) When writing an article about a particular film, the general format should be a concise lead section, followed by a plot summary of no more than 900 words, production details, a cast list, a reception section, and references. Create an Infobox that tells all pertinent information about the film.
Additional Information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no

Contents 1 Category:New Zealand films 2 SPOILER: Confusion about the gun 3 original research? 4 Crawford's car 5 Plot questions

[edit] Category:New Zealand films

The article was once in Category: American films [1] but was changed to Category: New Zealand films by an anon. [2] What makes it a New Zealand film? --Mrwojo 21:10, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Not seeing any justification, so it's been changed back. -- 16:06, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] SPOILER: Confusion about the gun

I am a little confused. In the movie, Crawford switches the handguns at the Hotel where the affair was taking place.

Then, he used Nunaly's gun to shoot his wife.

When Nunaly and Crawford lay down their guns, Nunaly took back his own, which was fired, leaving Crawford with his own gun, which was unfired.

I think that the article has it wrong in saying that Nunaly accidently takes Crawford's gun when Crawford is arrested. However, if that were the case, Nunaly's gun, which was fired (having been already switched at the hotel) would have been the one left behind as evidence. --Allyn 04:51, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

There's a small factual error. All Glocks are test fired at the factory to confirm proper operation and accuracy. They send you the fired casings in the package. Jm7316 05:19, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] original research?

moved here. a lot of implied meaning with no substantial backup

It is never revealed if he is found guilty or not, but heavily implied he is, given that the murder weapon has been found, and the bullet retrieved from his wife's head, along with the new confession. Also the fact Crawford confidently decides to represent himself back in the first trial, but for the second trial hires a team of lawyers shows that he thinks he will lose the new case.

Xaiver0510 (talk) 17:44, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Crawford's car

Can anyone identify the sports car Crawford (Hopkins) drives? Would this be appropriate to add to the Trivia section? Hoof Hearted (talk) 16:00, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Plot questions

I know this isn't a forum, but I thought these were some interesting plot holes and wondered if I missed anything:

1. How did Crawford know that Nunally would be the officer to arrive at his house and the one sent in to negotiate? If it had been any other cop, the registration would have led back to him, unraveling Crawford's entire plan.
2. The film implies that Crawford sent Beachum the actual murder weapon (Nunally's gun) as a "gift" after he was acquitted. If this is true, how could Crawford have come into possession of Nunally's gun after it was used in his suicide, and presumably sealed as evidence?
3. In the end, won't the evidence just show that Nunally's gun was used to shoot Jennifer? How would that prove that Crawford pulled the trigger (short of his confession to Beachum)? It appeared Crawford wiped his prints off the gun before making the final switch, and in the theatrical ending they don't make it clear whether or not he reloaded Nunally's gun (thus leaving his fingerprints on the chambered bullets). It still seems like weak evidence, not the slam dunk Beachum makes it out to be. It might actually be better suited to implicate Nunally killing Jennifer in a fit of jealousy.

Hoof Hearted (talk) 18:30, 13 March 2008 (UTC)\

He switched his gun for Nunally's gun, and used Nunally's gun to kill his wife. Then in the Negotiation when they both put down there guns, Crawford switches the guns back when Nunally is distracted by Jennifer. At the end of the movie Beachum gets Crawford to confess to everything and gets a gun, Crawfords gun. But i say "a gun" because Nunally had a bullet put into evidence, from a third gun. So now the gun Beachum has is Crawford's gun, but the bullet in evidence does and will not match it. And why would the cops get the bullet from his wifes head if there is already one in evidence?

IIRC, the planted bullet from the "third gun" that you describe was intended to match a gun planted on Crawford's property ("in the garage, taped under the lawnmower blade" or something like that). That was to be the definitive proof that Crawford owned the murder weapon - but of course Beachum couldn't bring himself to use it because he wanted to figure out the mystery and beat Crawford fair and square. As far as recovering a bullet from his wife's head, my guess is that other bullets were collected as evidence (Crawford's random shots after he killed his wife), but since they didn't actually cause her death they couldn't be used as proof of murder. The one in her head ended up killing her, thus that was the fatal shot. There was a chance that it was from a different gun - the one in Crawford's possession, so there was reason to examine it once she died. However, as I questioned in point #3, had he not confessed it would have simply matched Nunally's gun (as all the other bullets) and not directly implicated Crawford. And Crawford should have been smart enough to realize this. Maybe I missed something. Hoof Hearted (talk) 19:26, 12 May 2008 (UTC)